Editorial
By
There is a reason why this editorial is longer than the norm: there is a lot that deserves to be said. Censorship is often seen as the action of one group or individual upon another to prohibit sharing or publishing information. However, The Beacon Editorial Board has learned that censorship can come in other forms.
This week the University President, the Rev. Bill Beauchamp, C.S.C. forced The Beacon to publish an advertisement that has an impact far beyond the provocative face of a baby and the bold words printed next to it.
Let us explain. The Beacon, as mandated by our publisher Fr. Beauchamp, has an advertising policy that stipulates that no "pro-choice" ads are to run in the paper. Although this policy is unfortunate in that it stipulates that one side of an opinion be struck from debate, it is understandable that the publisher would make this decision at a Catholic school.
The Beacon Editorial Board reacted to this policy by setting a policy of our own making, a policy of neutrality. If we could not run ads about one side of an issue we would not run ads about the other side either (in this case, the "pro-life" stance). Deciding who can and cannot advertise based on the ideological message that is being presented in an advertisement is to have the power to create a slant or bias in the paper, and The Beacon wants to fight against this.
The University vigorously shot down this neutral advertising policy when it forced The Beacon to run the anti-abortion advertisement that is next to this editorial.
The impact of this type of censorship - limiting publication of one side of an issue and not the other - is that the University stifles student learning by prohibiting the free flow of information and ideas.
The Beacon is virtually the only news source at UP (from the students, at least). The "marketplace of ideas" at UP is thus limited, and ignoring The Beacon's request to be neutral on this issue makes it impossible for the paper to provide the University community with any degree of objectivity.
Forcing the paper to print this advertisement, a decision said to be made because of the Catholic foundation of this school, makes us question the way the University is nurturing the intellectual faith of students. Students not equipped to defend their ideas and beliefs are not prepared to be leaders or even keep their faith. Allowing one side of an argument to be advertised and not the other makes a decision for the students on what they should and should not value. Shouldn't the University want students to think for themselves?
UP holds a distinguished reputation in Portland and in Oregon. This censorship is detrimental to the University's image. Ultimately, the students should demand that the University president rethink ignoring The Beacon's wishes to have a neutral policy regarding the issue, and the Student Media Committee should use its collective wisdom to allow reputable journalism to foster.
